CA 241 - Foothill Transportation Corridor

[Voyager]

Has it been extended to San Diego yet? Last I heard it only went to Oso Parkway in Orange County.

[Alex]

Wow you are so out of the loop when it comes to SoCal...

The extension is definitely on hold, if not canceled. There's a huge debate going on about if public parkland (San Onofre State Beach)should be allowed to be used for the route, and that is the path of least resistance...

Some information can be found here.

^^Removed a broken link from the last sentence.

[74/171FAN]

Sounds like another US 48/Corridor H in West Virginia.  At least Corridor H doesn't go through Shenandoah National Park(it won't even make it to I-81 for at least 50 years if ever).

[mrivera1]

Personally, I say build, build, build.  Most of these people are complaining about interrupting certain rodents and bugs, and we have enough of those in the world.  As for the surfer's place...I'm not a surfer.  I think that it is better to build through a park and not bulldoze people's houses, and I am 100% positive that the people that live in the area would agree with that. 

[Voyager]

That attitude would scare many people in Norcal. I guess the Socal sentiment is different compared to ours.

[DrZoidberg]

I've never driven and of So Cal's toll highways.  Are they tag only? Or do people man tollbooths?

[FreewayDan]

Negative.  According to the TCA (Transportation Corridor Agency) website, they still accept cash.  The last time I was on them, I had to manually insert the cash at the toll booth like a soda or snack machine.

https://www.thetollroads.com/home/images/visor_map_08.pdf

[hm insulators]

They're actually both. There are tollbooths to pay cash, or you can get a special transponder, I think it's called and use the "Fast-Track" lanes.

[brentj650]

For anybody who's never been on the 241, I have a video of it up on my YouTube freeway videos page.  Watch it in HQ, for better quality.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvuNzLB6sKg

[andy3175]

What, no music?  Thanks for posting this ... another great road video.

Andy

[rschen7754]

Yeah... I'm not sure if it will ever be built at this rate.

[andy3175]

Bringing back this thread on California 241 (Foothill Transportation Corridor) ... the planned extension south to Interstate 5 was denied in 2008. Five years later, a permit necessary for the proposed extension of California 241 toll road from its current terminus at Oso Parkway south past Ladera Ranch to near California 74 (Ortega Hwy) was denied by the regional Water Quality Control Board on June 20, even though approval of this segment may not resurrect approval of the extension south to Interstate 5 at San Onofre.

LA Times Article: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-foothill--tesoro-toll-road-20130620,0,3307743.story

The plans for the shorter and renamed Foothill South extension hit another roadblock. A red light. They were slowed, or possibly ground to a halt. In any case, the San Diego Regional Quality Control Board delivered an unexpected "no" to a project that was just a fraction of the Transportation Corridor Agencies' original plan to build 16 miles of turnpike from eastern Orange County through San Onofre State Beach in northern San Diego County.

The agency says it wants to build a 5.5-mile toll road, two miles in each direction with room in the median for later expansion, called the Tesoro Extension, which would not cross into the state park. In a previous interview, a spokesman said the road was important for the planned Rancho Mission Viejo development, near Cleveland National Forest. The reaction of a  transportation planner for the development, whom I interviewed some months ago, was in essence, "Don't bother on our account." The road wasn't necessary to development; in fact, the developer had been required to devise a planned community that did not require the new highway. So the Tesoro would be something of a road to nowhere, It wouldn't connect to another major arterial, as originally planned, or to an employment hub. It would probably relieve some congestion from a major, nearby surface road, but that's a dubious reason to pave a big new highway through wetlands and habitat for endangered species.

[Quillz]

Personally, I say build, build, build.  Most of these people are complaining about interrupting certain rodents and bugs, and we have enough of those in the world.  As for the surfer's place...I'm not a surfer.  I think that it is better to build through a park and not bulldoze people's houses, and I am 100% positive that the people that live in the area would agree with that. 

You'd be amazed how much the world can be changed by the elimination of just "certain rodents and bugs." Imagine a world without bees, for example, or no spiders. It would completely alter the food chain.

[agentsteel53]

You'd be amazed how much the world can be changed by the elimination of just "certain rodents and bugs." Imagine a world without bees, for example, or no spiders. It would completely alter the food chain.

I do believe, however, that you can eliminate the mosquito with no lasting harm to the ecosystem. 

[mgk920]

You'd be amazed how much the world can be changed by the elimination of just "certain rodents and bugs." Imagine a world without bees, for example, or no spiders. It would completely alter the food chain.

I do believe, however, that you can eliminate the mosquito with no lasting harm to the ecosystem.

Mosquito larva are important fish food and the adult insects are important bird and bat food.



Mike

[agentsteel53]

Mosquito larva are important fish food and the adult insects are important bird and bat food.



Mike

other insects will pick up the slack. 

[Lytton]

I like it better if it extends to Ortega Highway (Route 82). You don't need to extend it to I-5 anyway. Ortega Highway can just pick up 241 traffic and transport them to I-5.

[national highway 1]

I like it better if it extends to Ortega Highway (Route 82). You don't need to extend it to I-5 anyway. Ortega Highway can just pick up 241 traffic and transport them to I-5.

Ortega Highway is Route 74.

[oscar]

I like it better if it extends to Ortega Highway (Route 82). You don't need to extend it to I-5 anyway. Ortega Highway can just pick up 241 traffic and transport them to I-5.

Ortega Highway (which is route 74) just east of its intersection with I-5 seems to be already seriously overloaded.  The motel I stay at when I visit my sister is near the SE corner of that interchange.  Fighting my way out of the motel parking lot onto the Ortega, to get to I-5, is a real struggle most of the time. 

[Desert Man]

Local environmentalists are halting the CA 241 extension project, including members of the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians. Whenever a highway proposal is over a rural stretch of land, look out for "NIMBY" activism to keep it from going ahead. Some drivers do want CA 241 to go all the way to the I-5 near San Onofre (Btw, their nuclear power plant is closing down), yet I don't foresee the CA 241 extension happening in the near future.

[sdmichael]

As 241 would only serve developments east of I-5 and not existing I-5 traffic (as in no relief), I don't wish it to be built. The extension (which would stop short of Hwy 74) that is currently being planned proves that fact all too well. It would be extend to serve a BRAND NEW housing development which only adds yet more traffic and does nothing for existing traffic. Having 241 go to I-5 would only serve to add traffic, not subtract, to I-5. Long distance commuters, mostly heading to San Diego County, would be the bulk of that traffic. Why do we need to open more areas to development just to cause more misery for everyone else? TCA is only looking out for TCA, not those their project would affect.

Simply put, SR-241 isn't a bypass or alternate to I-5, it is a feeder and serves to add to the existing congestion with no solution proposed.

[nexus73]

Once I-5 traffic gets past Camp Pendleton, having 241 available to divert eastbound traffic from I-5 coming up out of San Diego County strikes me as a good idea.  241 would work well for bringing the eastern metro area traffic heading south to San Diego County as well. 

What will likely be needed in the future is a freeway parallel to I-5.  Traffic is what it is thanks to having more people in SoCal than in any other state west of the Rockies.  Even LA County all by it's lonesome can claim that distinction!  The sheer amount of people down there is amazing.

Rick

[sdmichael]

Eastbound traffic from I-5 coming from the Camp Pendleton area? There is already a good freeway for that - I-15. SR-76 and SR-78 both connect to it quite easily. If 241 is being built to help that traffic, it only makes SR-91 worse and it is already at capacity most hours. 241 isn't a loop that returns to I-5, it only gets further away and really doesn't serve the same corridor. I wouldn't take it to go into Los Angeles from San Diego, it wouldn't make any sense to do so. At most, it would bypass up to SR-133 or SR-261, neither of which really gets you very far, with 261 not having a direct connection to I-5.

[nexus73]

There is some eastbound destination traffic that would take a completed 241.  Having been on I-15 and I-215 in April, those two freeways are doing a land office business as much has sprung up along the majority of the route and more is coming.  There really is no easy answer short of having a pandemic kill off half the people down there and even that would only put a temporary dent in the situation as more people would come in to replace those who died.  Everyone wants SoCal sunshine it seems...LOL!

What I wonder about is how well will mass transit solutions work in the years ahead for the human anthill that SoCal has become.  The freeways down there in the Seventies were usually quite driveable with a few stretches being congested.  Now it seems to be mostly congested with a few stretches being driveable. 

It is a real "yikes!" puzzle to solve.  I doubt it ever will be but I'm still going to watch!

Rick

[andy3175]

Update on the Tesoro Extension of California 241 (see https://www.thetollroads.com/whatshappening/projectsandinitiatives/tesoro_extension.php for a project map and current status update from Transportation Corridor Agencies or TCA):

First in April 2014, the TCA formally abandoned its plans to build the toll road all the way to Trestles and a junction with Interstate 5, at least for now:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/extension-608946-tca-road.html

The transportation agencies that have fought for years to extend the 241 toll road through pristine parkland at San Onofre State Beach on Tuesday formally set aside plans for the controversial route.

The Transportation Corridor Agencies withdrew two notices filed 13 years ago with the Federal Highway Administration to begin environmental reviews for the 16-mile extension to I-5 in San Diego and Orange counties. The route would have run through San Onofre State Beach, near Trestles, a hallowed surf spot.

The California Coastal Commission and the U.S. Department of Commerce both vetoed the proposed route in 2008, amid pressure from environmentalists, surfers and others.

But the toll road agencies never officially gave up on the extension, which would have created a huge pool of customers for the toll roads among motorists frustrated by the notorious congestion on I-5 between San Juan Capistrano and Northern San Diego.

"Rescinding the (notices) informs the public that we are not moving forward with the alignment that was within the coastal zone and objected to by the California Coastal Commission in 2008,"  Michael Kraman, TCA's acting CEO, said in a written statement Tuesday. "Any future projects south of Cow Camp Road would undergo a new environmental process."

By officially withdrawing the federal paperwork, TCA has effectively discarded environmental reviews that would take years to re-do.

Instead, TCA will focus on winning approval for a shorter extension, known as the SR-241 Tesoro Extension Project. The project would extend the toll road 5.5 miles from its endpoint at Oso Parkway near Coto de Caza to Cow Camp Road near Ortega Highway.

Environmentalists and the Coastal Commission were unimpressed by the formal action TCA announced Tuesday. Some continued to express doubt about the agency's motives, suggesting the announcement was a thinly-veiled ploy to win support for the Tesoro extension by distancing it from the longer extension.

Members of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board took a similar position when they voted last summer to deny TCA a necessary permit for the extension. Board member Sharon Kalemkiarian said at the time that she didn't believe TCA's claim that the 5.5-mile extension was an independent project. She suspected instead that it was just a step toward the 16-mile connection.

TCA has appealed the decision to the state Water Resources Control Board. The appeal was under review as of Tuesday.

The TCA disputes claims that the Tesoro extension makes little sense as a stand-alone project. The TCA says even the shorter extension will lessen traffic congestion on I-5, bring some 2,000 jobs to the region, and provide needed infrastructure for new homes.

The decision to abandon the link to 1-5 isn't likely to affect housing development in the area.

A Rancho Mission Viejo spokeswoman said Tuesday that the planned development of up to 14,000 new homes east of San Juan Capistrano has never been dependent on extending the toll road south of Oso Parkway.

Coincidentally, Rancho Mission Viejo issued a statement earlier Tuesday saying that 500 of the 940 homes in Sendero, the development's first phase, already have sold, putting the two-year sales plan well ahead of schedule.

Meanwhile, in October 2014, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) approved its Regional Transportation Improvement Program for 2014 (see http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_1886_18190.pdf). Interestingly, the RTIP for SANDAG continues to show the SR 241 extension connecting to I-5 near Trestles (which is near the Cristianitos Road interchange), but I suspect this is due to the lag time and inter-agency coordination needed to update these long-range planning documents:

Project Title:
TCA01
Transportation Corridor Agencies
ADOPTION: 14-00
Project Description: On SR 241 from Orange/San Diego County line to Cristianitos interchange - construct 3 general purpose toll lanes; from Cristianitos interchange to I-5 - construct 2 general purpose toll lanes
Foothill Transportation Corridor South
RT:241 Capacity Status: CI Exempt Category: Non-Exempt
Est Total Cost: $536,520 Open to Traffic: Phase 1: Dec 2022 Phase 2: Dec 2030

So maybe the final extension all the way to I-5 is on ice? But it seems like the focus is the Tesoro Extension.